When product quality and variety can be varied, the yield from a commodity tax is likely to depend not only on the overall rate but also on the form of the tax. This article compares specific and ad valorem taxes from a perspective of revenue maximization. The analysis shows that both kinds of tax are likely to distort nonprice behavior, but suggests that revenue considerations will commonly point to predominantly specific taxation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BARZELY. (1976) “An alternative approach to the analysis of taxation.” J. of Pol. Economy (December).
2.
BOHANONC. E., and VAN COTTT. N. (1984) “Specific taxes, product quality and rate-revenue analysis.” Public Finance Q. (October).
3.
DIXITA. K., and STIGLITZJ. E. (1977) “Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity.” Amer. Econ. Rev. (June).
4.
FALVEYR. E. (1979) “The composition of trade within import-restricted categories.” J. of Pol. Economy (October).
5.
FEENSTRAR. C. (1985) “Automobile prices and protection: the US-Japan trade restraint.” J. of Policy Modeling (January).
6.
GORMANW. M. (1980) “A possible procedure for analysing differentials in the egg market.” Rev. of Econ. Studies (October).
7.
KayJ. A., and KEENM. J. (1983) “How should commodities be taxed?” European Econ. Rev. (October).
8.
KayJ. A., and KEENM. J. (1985) “Alcohol and tobacco taxes in the European Community: criteria for harmonisation.” In CnossenS. (ed.) Tax Coordination in the European Community.
9.
KRISHNAK. (1984) “Protection and the product line: monopoly and product quality.” Harvard Institute of Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 1116 (December).
10.
LANCASTERK. (1966) “A new approach to consumer theory.” J. of Pol. Economy (April).
11.
MUSGRAVER. A. (1959) The Theory of Public Finance.Tokyo: McGraw-Hill.
12.
SALOPS. C. (1979) “Monopolistic competition with outside goods.” Bell J. of Economics (Spring).
